Can an Islamic State be Secular?

[Jigs]

Ya sure...Jefferson in particular was against Christianity but that does not take anything away from the fact that the founding fathers were men of faith and Christians. But they had the sense and wisdom to keep religion away as far as possible from the state.

Though there have been some efforts by the right in recent times to rewrite history in this regard.

I would question that. Benjamin Franklin was another one. They certainly were very critical of religion as a whole. I think they wouldn't be too happy with this whole you have to profess you are a christian to by elected in high forms of government issue. Not that that is different in Turkey though if you campaigned it that would not be good. It just means we still have work to do.

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

I asked a simple question but no body answered... So I m asking you... as the article suggests that Islamic state is equivalent to secular state then why not we fight for Islamic state instead of secular state??

You might want to read this:
Islam and economic development
Islam and economic development

Islamic constraints to development

In Islam, women are inferior to men, Quran (4:34). No alternative quotations or excuses can prove otherwise. Recent figures from the International Labor Organization, published by the World Bank, indicate that in the Middle East and North Africa, women comprise 28% of the total labor force whereas the world average is 40%. As a group, these countries have the lowest female labor force participation rate in the world. One of the lowest figures is Saudi Arabia with 16%. As distance from the Arabian Peninsula increases, so does the proportion of women in the labor force. In Pakistan the figure is 28.6 percent,

The nature of Islamic education may not be helpful in developing open minded citizens fully equipped to fulfill their ambitions and potential. The time devoted to daily religious observances and annual festivals such as Ramadan may detract from time available for economically productive activities to a greater extent compared with other religions. The religion contributes to an attitude of fatalism and complacency. Even in countries with oil wealth, there has been a conspicuous failure to effectively use revenues for the purpose of industrial development.


The constraints and costs imposed on financial institutions by the nominal prohibition on interest payments may preclude a free market in financial capital, causing inefficiency, moral hazard in banking, and limiting the funds available for investment. The prohibition on interests serves no beneficial purpose. Apart from it being banned by the Quran, there is no reason in modern times for the charging of interest to be considered immoral. In ancient times unscrupulous tax collectors may have forced people to pay exorbitant and unreasonable interest on unpaid taxes. Today, there is no compulsion, but rather competition between lenders to offer attractive rates. Those that borrow money receive a service and those that lend it provide one. Elaborate schemes to circumvent such transactions because of their supposed immorality or due to their prohibition in Islam serve no purpose except to increase costs and increase inefficiency.

Islamic tax regimes may negatively effect resource allocation, productivity and innovation. Conflict between secular and sharia law may contribute to an ineffective rule of law, a lack of trust in judicial institutions, moral hazard in judiciary, limitation on property rights and contract law, all of which have negative economic consequences. Religious constraints on the freedom of speech and on the power of the legislature, may impinge on democratic rights, institutions, political freedom and the ability to expose and eradicate corruption, again with negative economic impacts.

Where religion contributes to the order of society and a feeling of well being amongst citizens, its benefits may seem considerable. When it contributes to ignorance, inefficiency and poverty it becomes a cost to society and a liability.

I say when you add religion and goverment togather you have a real mess.

 

[Ras]

I would question that. Benjamin Franklin was another one. They certainly were very critical of religion as a whole. I think they wouldn't be too happy with this whole you have to profess you are a christian to by elected in high forms of government issue. Not that that is different in Turkey though if you campaigned it that would not be good. It just means we still have work to do.

Yes...citizens have to be vigilant against allowing religious yahoo's(of every stripe) to take over their country.

 

[Al-zakir]

The freedom of speech is paramount above any religion.

I do not see it as you see it.

You are suggesting an absence of religion in state. You are to push for atheism where religion do not exist. United sate still a semi-christian state so far I have experienced over the years. We have Christmas as state holiday. we have "In God we trust" in currency and more ever folding of American flag represent the " In God we trust" symbol. There isn't true secular state any where in the world. The label of secularism is a mere deception to allow anti-religious behaviors to fulfill once ill will.

In God We Trust: The Meaning of the Folds of the American Flag
In God We Trust: The Meaning of the Folds of the American Flag - U.s. - Catholic Online

 

[Raghu]

Can an Islamic State be Secular?

You can't be a Islamic State , Christian country, Hindu nation or Jewish state and as well as a secular state at the same time.

This is 21century when whole world is coming closer than ever before and a becoming a global village.In that regard, every state should be secular and leave religion to individuals as every religion says that religion something between u and god.

So in that sense the state have be secular and only secular while enacting its laws whereas citizens can adhere to any belief systems,have religious preferences and prejudice based on it in their private capacities only, as long as they don't hamper th same right of other citizens.

 

[Ras]

I do not see it as you see it.

You are suggesting an absence of religion in state. You are to push for atheism where religion do not exist. United sate still a semi-christian state so far I have experienced over the years. We have Christmas as state holiday. we have "In God we trust" in currency and more ever folding of American flag represent the " In God we trust" symbol. There isn't true secular state any where in the world. The label of secularism is a mere deception to allow anti-religious behaviors to fulfill once ill will.

In God We Trust: The Meaning of the Folds of the American Flag
In God We Trust: The Meaning of the Folds of the American Flag - U.s. - Catholic Online

"God" on the currency need not by definition represent the Christian god..it can be the unicorn god if you want it to be.

Sure as a Christian majority nation there are references to Christianity in a minority of state instruments.But your religion does not stop you from being anything in the US. A few posts back you wrote about the mosque coming up near ground zero as if it is a triumph of Islam over US. You cannot be more wrong.It is the strength of the US that a mosque is being ALLOWED in that area.If the US population of which Muslims are only a small minority did not want the mosque there there would be no mosque but that would go against the basic foundations of this country.

 

[sparklingway]

But your religion does not stop you from being anything in the US.

Except in politics where anyone has to mumble about God even if he is not from the Bible belt. With at least a 12% population defining themselves as agnostic or atheistic, there's only 1 atheist representative in Congress.

But this does not mean that there's a lack of sepearation between state and religion.

I've read numerous cases where boards of ten commandments have had to be removed from state buildings as they were in violation of separation between religion and state.

Many of the founding fathers were deists in a general sense (distant god), and clearly not inclined towards Christianity, but like Pakistan the religious ones have tried to hijack their names as being some kind of super-Christians as well.

 

[Bang Galore]

We Muslim restrain our self from making unwanted comment against religions.

Yeah right !

You just do not know, do you? Only handful of post 71 generation Awamis are pure Munafiq and Hindu god worshiper in soul. All we need to wipe them sons and daughters of low caste rejected Hindus. Rest Awami will be inline with mainstream Bangladeshi Muslims in no time. Time is ripe and things can take effect like revolution of 75 in no time.

Problem lie with Gaddar govenment in Dhaka. These earthworm busy demising opposition yet innocent Bangladeshi farmers are dieing on the hand of maloon BSF. Sons and daughters of Hindu residue Awami must be wipe out from Bangladeshi soil to purify the country form ground up.

 

[EjazR]

@CAPTAIN AMERICA

I think the author is confusing and mixing up a few things and is misinformed about others.

Here is a quote from the Israeli paper Haaretz for 2009 stats on female work participation:

On the other hand, the rate of female employment in Saudi Arabia and Oman - two countries generally considered to have low female employment rates - is 29 percent and 27 percent, respectively. The rate in Morocco is 41.9 percent, and as high as 63.3 percent in Mauritania.
Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Since Saudi Arabia is considered to be have the least female work participation, I would assume Pakistan would be higher than that. Even in a conservative society as SA, the trend has been generally up without sacrificing any religious requirements i.e. Hijab e.t.c. Infact, most of them got the courage by looking at muslim women in the western world who work in their workplaces without any problems for the most of it.

About "religious education", the vast majority of muslims DO NOT attend religious education. Where ever there is a possibility the parents prefer educating their son to become a doctor/engineer e.t.c. rather than a mullah. This is a universal phenomenon barring a few negligible exceptions here and there. And daily prayers hardly take up time, they usually last for less than 5 minutes at a time. Besides, the fact is that a large number of people DO NOT perform their regular five time daily prayers either. Its usually a once a week 1 hour visit on Fridays.


Having said that, the problems are more --if I use very general terms -the defeatist mindset of the Muslim society and a fear of anything and everything being against Islam. And this could be a combination of things particularly the rise of the political-Islamic ideology where Islam is "forced" top down onto the people which is against traditional Islamic thinking. However, this ideology is being driven back to the fringes and has already been marginalized extensively. There is also a lack of political expression in many Arab and Muslim countries because of dictatorships across the board which have been ironically supported by the west, which in turn boosted these fringe groups.

I think the main article is correct in the sense that if you define secularism as it is practiced in US/India/UK meaning not the negation of religion but equal rights for all religious groups. The French or Turkish version is more a negation of religion with the Soviet and Chinese models resulting in a kind of oppression of religious groups.

Having a state where Islamic scholars are legislating matters or are part of the rulers is actually an anomaly in Islamic history. Unlike the catholic church in Christianity which held enormous power during the middle ages, there was no organized "church" in Islam that was part of the ruling class. That is why a "true" Islamic state ---if you would call it that--- would actually keep religion private and treat all religious faiths (including atheists because it is also based on the belief that God does not exist) as equal in the "eyes of the state".

 

[Ras]

Except in politics where anyone has to mumble about God even if he is not from the Bible belt. With at least a 12% population defining themselves as agnostic or atheistic, there's only 1 atheist representative in Congress.

But this does not mean that there's a lack of sepearation between state and religion.

I've read numerous cases where boards of ten commandments have had to be removed from state buildings as they were in violation of separation between religion and state.

Many of the founding fathers were deists in a general sense (distant god), and clearly not inclined towards Christianity, but like Pakistan the religious ones have tried to hijack their names as being some kind of super-Christians as well.

True..but the state cannot impose her laws on religion not being a factor on the people. So the proclamations about being a Christian during elections.

 

[sparklingway]

True..but the state cannot impose her laws on religion not being a factor on the people. So the proclamations about being a Christian during elections.

I was concerned more with political candidates and representatives. You have to agree about everyone having to mumble about God and not going all pro-evolution either (although you aren't pro-science, you're just normal).

They have to appease the fundamental and brainless Christians all the time, since they have become far more vocal than their population would suggest thanks to Reagan. Most walk a narrow strip and appease both the rational side and the fundamental ones on issues of religion (with some like Reagan and Bush(es) clearly on one side).

The separation between religion and state has been heavily enforced owing to court judgments but the role of peoples' representative having to adhere to religious dogmas is quite idiotic.

Look at Britain. You will never see any of them talking about "Christian values". Britain is the only English speaking country where evolution is not viewed as something negative (Darwin being British has influence of course) and where atheism has mainstream acceptance. Other countries have different conditions on different issues but none is as fundamental as the US when it comes to atheism or teaching evolution. It's plain crazy.

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

@CAPTAIN AMERICA

I think the author is confusing and mixing up a few things and is misinformed about others.

Here is a quote from the Israeli paper Haaretz for 2009 stats on female work participation:




Since Saudi Arabia is considered to be have the least female work participation, I would assume Pakistan would be higher than that. Even in a conservative society as SA, the trend has been generally up without sacrificing any religious requirements i.e. Hijab e.t.c. Infact, most of them got the courage by looking at muslim women in the western world who work in their workplaces without any problems for the most of it.

About "religious education", the vast majority of muslims DO NOT attend religious education. Where ever there is a possibility the parents prefer educating their son to become a doctor/engineer e.t.c. rather than a mullah. This is a universal phenomenon barring a few negligible exceptions here and there. And daily prayers hardly take up time, they usually last for less than 5 minutes at a time. Besides, the fact is that a large number of people DO NOT perform their regular five time daily prayers either. Its usually a once a week 1 hour visit on Fridays.


Having said that, the problems are more --if I use very general terms -the defeatist mindset of the Muslim society and a fear of anything and everything being against Islam. And this could be a combination of things particularly the rise of the political-Islamic ideology where Islam is "forced" top down onto the people which is against traditional Islamic thinking. However, this ideology is being driven back to the fringes and has already been marginalized extensively. There is also a lack of political expression in many Arab and Muslim countries because of dictatorships across the board which have been ironically supported by the west, which in turn boosted these fringe groups.

I think the main article is correct in the sense that if you define secularism as it is practiced in US/India/UK meaning not the negation of religion but equal rights for all religious groups. The French or Turkish version is more a negation of religion with the Soviet and Chinese models resulting in a kind of oppression of religious groups.

Having a state where Islamic scholars are legislating matters or are part of the rulers is actually an anomaly in Islamic history. Unlike the catholic church in Christianity which held enormous power during the middle ages, there was no organized "church" in Islam that was part of the ruling class. That is why a "true" Islamic state ---if you would call it that--- would actually keep religion private and treat all religious faiths (including atheists because it is also based on the belief that God does not exist) as equal in the "eyes of the state".

The GDP of Paistan is GDP - per capita (PPP):
$2,600 (2009 est.) the entire GDP of the entire Islamic world includeing the oil is only about 4 percent about the size of Germany.

Most western countries graduate more scientist then the entire Islamic world...I think the fellow who wrote the article has a point and the sad economic and education of the Islamic World proves that point.

I was reading a article by Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy His own university, which is ranked second among OIC academic institutions, has three mosques on its campus but not one bookstore. How in the world do you run a university with out a bookstore. That is downright weird.

 

[Bang Galore]

Look at Britain. You will never see any of them talking about "Christian values". Britain is the only English speaking country where evolution is not viewed as something negative (Darwin being British has influence of course) and where atheism has mainstream acceptance. Other countries have different conditions on different issues but none is as fundamental as the US when it comes to atheism or teaching evolution. It's plain crazy.

Australia? Canada ? New Zealand ? English speaking part of India?? Funnily Hindus don't seem to have much a problem with evolution ( probably because the religion itself has evolved & continues to do so).Same holds true for Buddhists.

West Europeans for the most part with the exception of Italy & maybe Spain are irreligious with people people paying more attention to science than religion.

 

[bc040400065]

You might want to read this:
Islam and economic development
Islam and economic development

Islamic constraints to development

In Islam, women are inferior to men, Quran (4:34). No alternative quotations or excuses can prove otherwise. Recent figures from the International Labor Organization, published by the World Bank, indicate that in the Middle East and North Africa, women comprise 28% of the total labor force whereas the world average is 40%. As a group, these countries have the lowest female labor force participation rate in the world. One of the lowest figures is Saudi Arabia with 16%. As distance from the Arabian Peninsula increases, so does the proportion of women in the labor force. In Pakistan the figure is 28.6 percent,

The nature of Islamic education may not be helpful in developing open minded citizens fully equipped to fulfill their ambitions and potential. The time devoted to daily religious observances and annual festivals such as Ramadan may detract from time available for economically productive activities to a greater extent compared with other religions. The religion contributes to an attitude of fatalism and complacency. Even in countries with oil wealth, there has been a conspicuous failure to effectively use revenues for the purpose of industrial development.


The constraints and costs imposed on financial institutions by the nominal prohibition on interest payments may preclude a free market in financial capital, causing inefficiency, moral hazard in banking, and limiting the funds available for investment. The prohibition on interests serves no beneficial purpose. Apart from it being banned by the Quran, there is no reason in modern times for the charging of interest to be considered immoral. In ancient times unscrupulous tax collectors may have forced people to pay exorbitant and unreasonable interest on unpaid taxes. Today, there is no compulsion, but rather competition between lenders to offer attractive rates. Those that borrow money receive a service and those that lend it provide one. Elaborate schemes to circumvent such transactions because of their supposed immorality or due to their prohibition in Islam serve no purpose except to increase costs and increase inefficiency.

Islamic tax regimes may negatively effect resource allocation, productivity and innovation. Conflict between secular and sharia law may contribute to an ineffective rule of law, a lack of trust in judicial institutions, moral hazard in judiciary, limitation on property rights and contract law, all of which have negative economic consequences. Religious constraints on the freedom of speech and on the power of the legislature, may impinge on democratic rights, institutions, political freedom and the ability to expose and eradicate corruption, again with negative economic impacts.

Where religion contributes to the order of society and a feeling of well being amongst citizens, its benefits may seem considerable. When it contributes to ignorance, inefficiency and poverty it becomes a cost to society and a liability.

I say when you add religion and goverment togather you have a real mess.

Another Islamophobia article. let me ask you a queston Why you people in west always raise concerns about Sharia being implemented or A state being islamic. ??

I think Isreal is a jewish state so when should i expect from the west to demand Isreal to be declared a secular state and end its association with religion???

 

[EjazR]

@CAPTAIN AMERICA
Like I pointed out, there are some glaring inaccuracies. For example the claim that the entire "Islamic world" GDP is 4% of Germany's GDP is again inaccurate. (Did the author make that claim or did you come with that?)

Germany is around 3 trillion dollars and Indonesia around 1 trillion. This one country alone is about 33%. Then there are other close to 800B dollar economies like Iran and Turkey with Saudi Arabia and the GCC bloc having a GDP of about 1.2 trillion. I have not even added the "Muslim contribution" to GDP in subcontinent including India either.


At the time when a quarter of the population of Europe was dying from Plague, academics from India China, Egypt and Arab countries were developing various fields including algebra, astronomy e.t.c. in universities established in mainly Muslim ruled areas. Many people don't realize this but while the middle ages was the dark ages for the west, it was the golder period in the ME which played an important role in shaping western culture. An important read on this is Lyons The House of Wisdom. I highly suggest grabbing a copy if you could.
The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization by Jonathan Lyons - Times Online

The important thing to realise is that the Islamic world is not a monolith. Qatar on one hand has the highest HDI and the second highest GDP per capita in the world is part of the Islamic world. And at the same time Afghanistan with its endless conflicts and superpower interventions where the quality of life is at the other extreme is as well. Where you have Indonesia, the largest Muslim country which is democratic names its airline after a Hindu God and at one point in time had a Hindu as a constitutional head. You also have "secular" autocratic dictators in CARs who oppress people and even punish people for just practicing Islamic rituals.

So like I mentioned, the point is to keep religion as personal and not impose it at state level. Be that atheism or faith in any religion I think you would be surprised to know that other than Iran, there is no other Muslim country that has given religious scholars constitutional authority. The Taliban in Afghanistan were the only other country but they are not in power now. While Saudi Arabia is given as an example as well, the religious scholars there are not the kingmakers as much as they would like to be. By and large, the politcal-Islamic ideology has been rejected in the muslim world, particularly the arab world. Ofcourse I do admit that at times, these muslim scholars do form a powerful lobby group.

However, Pakistan is a different story and different circumstances all together and the need to remove the religious nationalists ideology is still needed.